Slow animation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Sgt. Rick -> Slow animation (7/18/2000 7:05:00 AM)

Forgive me if this a much asked question, but ever since I upgraded 2.3, the game animations have been pretty slow. I tried to find a message about this, but have failed so far. Please help me! Thanks for not slamming me... [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Rick P.S. AWESOME GAME!



Tomanbeg -> (7/18/2000 7:22:00 AM)

I think there is a thread back in june saying to set the speed controls to 'XXX'. Look around June 23rd, maybe. The 'ol RAM ain't what it used to be. And I havn't seen much flaming here. Unless, of course, you want to be flamed. In which case you will find a overabundance of verbose volunteers. T.



Wild Bill -> (7/18/2000 10:58:00 AM)

Correct, Tomanbeg...On the money!...WB ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games



Sgt. Rick -> (7/19/2000 8:56:00 AM)

Thanks guys... [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]



ASDN -> (7/21/2000 7:39:00 PM)

That's not quite right. I have the K6-2-333MHz & 64MB & S3 VIRGE 2MB and it takes 3-4 seconds to move one OT-34 through 12 hexes in the Last Stand at Seelowe scenario (map zoomed out to the max). At the comp.sys.ibm.pc.war-historical the guy named "schalken" reported the same times on K6-3-450MHz & 256MB computer (and probably he has a quite decent GFX card). It seems quite slow. I slowed down my computer to 200MHz and get 6-8 seconds for this move - which is unacceptable slow. So moving 10 tanks takes about 1 minute on 200MHz system [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img] There were some suspection, the problems comes from the code optimized for Pentium processor, which works slow on AMD machines. Any comments from the guys with Intel Pentium machines ? [This message has been edited by ASDN (edited July 21, 2000).]



Arralen -> (7/21/2000 8:22:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by ASDN: That's not quite right.I have the K6-2-333MHz & 64MB & S3 VIRGE 2MB and it takes 3-4 seconds to move one OT-34 through 12 hexes in the Last Stand at Seelowe scenario (map zoomed out to the max). At the comp.sys.ibm.pc.war-historical the guy named "schalken" reported the same times on K6-3-450MHz & 256MB computer (and probably he has a quite decent GFX card). It seems quite slow.I slowed down my computer to 200MHz and get 6-8 seconds for this move - which is unacceptable slow. So moving 10 tanks takes about 1 minute on 200MHz system [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img] There were some suspection, the problems comes from the code optimized for Pentium processor, which works slow on AMD machines. Any comments from the guys with Intel Pentium machines ? [This message has been edited by ASDN (edited July 21, 2000).]
Hohoho. I'll try on my old machine - K5/166 on Chaintech 5IFM0 with 64 MB. [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/cool.gif[/img] But I'm pretty shure you just forgot to set the movement delay ot minimum (preferences!) [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] Arralen [This message has been edited by Arralen (edited July 21, 2000).]



Nikademus -> (7/21/2000 8:46:00 PM)

When i upgraded to 2.3 i found all the delay settings had been set back to default which slowed the game down considerably. just go back into the preferences and recustomize speaking of customize....any word on possibly creating a seperate delay setting for AFV hits (with all that juicy location and pen information!)



ASDN -> (7/21/2000 10:32:00 PM)

I posted my message because I had set the movement delay to XXX [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img] And schalken had set it, too. And, of course, we tried to turn off the graphics acceleration in the DirectX (as the Paul Veber had suggested) and it didn't help. [This message has been edited by ASDN (edited July 21, 2000).]



Voriax -> (7/22/2000 2:53:00 AM)

ASDN, I have a K6-2/300@336, 96 megs memory and a TNT2 video card and no difference in speed between 2.2 and 2.3 versions. Also the speed has always been fast enough. I guess you have noticed how the speed varies depending if enemies see your unit or not? I think they do a bunch of opfire checks each time you move a hex so that causes some jerkiness. Also as microsoft claims the DX7 is AMD(3dnow) optimized that probably isn't a problem....now what version of M$ofts memory hog operating systems you use? 64 megs of memory with a win98 for example isn't very much...even less with that latest thing they foisted on us. Or then the video card...with 800x600 resolution that 2MB is getting full..think you could borrow a TNT card or similar from somewhere and try? If that solves the problem such card should not cost very much nowadays. Voriax



Kluckenbill -> (7/22/2000 6:36:00 AM)

On a slightly different issue . . . . is there some way to speed up the replay of my opponent's turn in a PBEM game? My video is just fine but the replay takes forever. I have fast artillery on and all options to XXX but its still interminably slow.



ASDN -> (7/22/2000 3:55:00 PM)

Voriax, Short answer: 1. I moved unit in the direction opposite to the enemies and the front line is full of smoke (after a barrage) so probably no even a single enemy saw my movement. Yes - I use "jerkiness" to detect enemies, I hasn't spot (just look witch hexes become visible after move - it is so hard not to take it into account). 2. DX7 seems optimized for K6-2. I got some speed boost after installing it. But we are talking about optimization of the SPW@W code. 3. I have 14MB free memory with SPW@W with the scenario & ICQ & smaller utils and no swap file yet. 4. SPW@W apparently uses 800x600x256 color mode (I know how to set the refresh rate for SPW@W [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] ). This mode uses only 450KB of the video memory. I don't know if SPW@W uses the rest of it. Maybe Mike can give us some tips (I know how to use the off-screen memory in the DDraw programming) ? But it is still pretty much (1.5MB free) for icons. 5. I have no AGP slot. This is PCI card, but Schalten seems to have more decent AGP card (look at his configuration). But the S3 Virge is *VERY* fast 2D card.



kao16 -> (7/22/2000 5:10:00 PM)

I'm running v2.3 on a pre MMX pentium 120 with 80 MB RAM and a 4 MB video card. It's noticeably slower than DOS based SP games, but I'm not experiencing the delays people are reporting (have speed settings on 1).



ASDN -> (7/22/2000 6:39:00 PM)

Kao16, Could you measure the time of the movement described above? You don't need to be *very* precise [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Just if it is 1 second, 2 seconds or 3-4 seconds or so. If you have the faster movement than I have probably the delay calculation is invalid on K6 machines [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img]



ASDN -> (7/22/2000 6:40:00 PM)

Kao16, Could you measure the time of the movement described above? You don't need to be *very* precise [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Just if it is 1 second, 2 seconds or 3-4 seconds or so. If you have the faster movement than I have probably the delay calculation is invalid on K6 machines [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img]



Voriax -> (7/22/2000 7:32:00 PM)

Well ASDN, then I can't figure out what is the problem. I still think that the problem lies specially in your system as I have the same CPU but a better video card and no speed problems whatsoever. I doubt the SPWAW code is optimized for either of the major CPU's but just for the Direct X. Michael Wood could tell us more about that. As for swap file, have you thought about setting a fixed size swap file? About 2,5 times the memory amount. My WIN95 started behaving much nicer after I set that swap file. Voriax



schalken -> (7/22/2000 1:27:00 AM)

Hello everyone, About this movement speed issue. Voriax says the speed has always been fast enough on his K6, but what is fast for you. Paul Vebber said it takes less than half a second to move a tank the full allowance on his P3/667. This is nearly ten times faster than I've heard any K6 owner confirm in this little test. So how fast is it Voriax? Less than one second or more than three? Video card speed is irrelevant, moving one bitmap around. 99.9% of time is probably consumed by various CPU level calculations. I wonder how slow some more stressing operations like scrolling would be if mere unit moves take four seconds due to poor video card. Swap file size has no effect. This is Windows 95 OSR2. And consider - in a 200 unit scenario of 30 turns, with an average delay of just 2 seconds, unit moves take about three and half *hours* in total. I'd really like to hear what Michael Wood has to say.



ASDN -> (7/22/2000 3:29:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Voriax: I doubt the SPWAW code is optimized for either of the major CPU's but just for the Direct X. Michael Wood could tell us more about that.
The code can't be optimized for DirectX (I can't figured out what it means). But in the case you are right and it is possible the code can be optimized for DX, that the SPW@W is likely not optimized for Direct X because it is conversion of DOS game (Paul Veber confirmed it indirectly on war-historical newsgroup by pointing out that one can't compare native Win32&DirectX game like TOAW with the converted one like SPW@W). But for sure the code can be optimized for the particular CPU and SPW@W looks like optimized for the Pentium machines or similar ones, because there is a non-logical order of instructions in the code (to help keeping busy both pipelines in Pentium CPU). It can be also optimized for PII machines - it is not clear from the code to me (and I have no time to dig in it more).
quote:

As for swap file, have you thought about setting a fixed size swap file? About 2,5 times the memory amount. My WIN95 started behaving much nicer after I set that swap file.
Maybe my answer wasn't clear enough. When I am playing SPW@W with the mentioned scenario I have about 14-16MB free RAM with ICQ and WinPopup running in the background. My Windows 95 SR2 doesn't even try to use the swap file yet so its setting is irrelevant. Maybe it seems like a flaming to Voriax but I swear it is not my intention. Let's only make things clear. But today I tested SPW@W on the Intel PII 350MHz machine with 64MB RAM and 8MB AGP Riva 128ZX GFX card, under Win98. I got the same results 3-4 seconds for the move (in the same conditions as above). So it is not the K6 problem. How much faster can be the P3/667 ? Six to eight times ? Especially comparing to the K6-450 with Matrox Millenium II card (schalken). And I agree with schalken that the video card speed is irrelevant. But maybe not in 99.9%. I want to ask MG if there exist a chance to reduce the movement time ? Maybe even by factor of 2 or 4 ? It helps also with PBEM replay time [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img]



schalken -> (7/22/2000 6:02:00 AM)

ASDN, Interesting... But Pentium II doesn't support SSE instructions. K6-2 & K6-3 do support 3DNow. DirectX supports both SSE & 3DNow. So if the code is optimized for Intel, but DirectX 'favors' K6 in this case, P2 & K6 are equally fast. (Where is Michael Wood?) P3/667 is up to 50% faster than K6-3/450 as far as integer is concerned. Significantly more in floating.



Voriax -> (7/22/2000 6:08:00 AM)

ASDN, you know where the shortie 'IBM' comes from? No? Well, it means 'It's Black Magic' the bugs and strange behaviour of computers are numerous. i'm one of the persons/reasons why you don't have sound with fast arty, as I got frequent crashes with sound on during bombardment. Latest drivers, DX, everything. I did time a full movement of OT-34 at the Seelowe scenario, it was slightly under 2 seconds with the movement rate a default. It is fast enough for me, should it be faster I'd want to slow it down. No jerkiness whatsoever, just smooth movement. Btw ASDN, no offense taken. And I seem to run the same Win version as you. This is really baffling. I assume you have run a pile of benchmarks etc to verify your computer works normally and performs at expected level with other programs? i might throw in a one more guess. As you may have noticed I have a slightly overclocked CPU, namely the system bus and memory run at 112 MHZ. If SPWAW likes fast memory this might be a partial cause. some programs like seti@home are really happy if they get fast memory and get a 20% performance gain from it. Voriax ps. IBM may also mean 'Idiots Built Me'



schalken -> (7/22/2000 3:14:00 PM)

Voriax, does your system beat these? Moving the OT-34 at 77,13 to 90,12 (13 hexes) Movement Delay set to XXX Map zoomed in - less than 1.5 seconds Map zoomed out - less than 3.5 seconds Movement Delay set to 1 Map zoomed in - 4 seconds Map zoomed out - 5.5 seconds Movement Delay set to 2 Map zoomed in - 6 seconds Map zoomed out - 8 seconds According to benchmarks (like WinTune), 2D video, memory and CPU performance is just as fast as K6-3 is at 450. And Quake1 scores above 30 fps at 640x400.



schalken -> (7/22/2000 3:31:00 PM)

Voriax, does your system beat these? Moving the OT-34 at 77,13 to 90,12 (13 hexes) Movement Delay set to XXX Map zoomed in - less than 1.5 seconds Map zoomed out - less than 3.5 seconds Movement Delay set to 1 Map zoomed in - 4 seconds Map zoomed out - 5.5 seconds Movement Delay set to 2 Map zoomed in - 6 seconds Map zoomed out - 8 seconds According to benchmarks (like WinTune), 2D video, memory and CPU performance is just as fast as K6-3 is at 450. And Quake1 scores above 30 fps at 640x400.



kao16 -> (7/22/2000 4:09:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by ASDN: Kao16, Could you measure the time of the movement described above? You don't need to be *very* precise [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Just if it is 1 second, 2 seconds or 3-4 seconds or so. If you have the faster movement than I have probably the delay calculation is invalid on K6 machines [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img]
Tried Last stand at Seelowe. Live delay - 160 Scroll delay - 1 movement delay - 1 message delay - 150 (took some 58 minutes to complete the initial bombardment- next time I will reduce all delay to 1 before I start) Movement of OT-34 moving maximum number of hexs (on road, requiring turn to retreat) about 8 sec. JSIII max movement forward - 4 sec (couldn't cross the river, a lot of changes of direction to go around troops and tanks) OT-34 moving maximum allowance NNE (up map) 4-5 sec. So, it seems to be as slow as you are getting but it is a running on a P120 (pre-MMX), 80 MB (70 ns) RAM, and Grafixstar 700 with 4 MB.



Voriax -> (7/22/2000 4:39:00 PM)

Schalken, here are my results for the same tank and same destination: Delay XXX IN: less than 2 secs OUT: less than 3,5 secs Delay 1 IN: Bit over 4 secs OUT: Less than 6 secs Delay 2 IN: Less than 7 secs Out: About 8,5 secs. As for Quake benchmarks, I don't even have 1 installed but at Q2 I got something around 45fps at 1024x768 So the movement speed in my system is roughly same as in yours. I normally play at XXX speed setting and map zoom is at one of the 2 middle steps, depending of the situation. For me the speed is okay, I don't like tanks zipping around [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Voriax



ASDN -> (7/22/2000 10:39:00 PM)

Hi guys, I tried to figure out if the movement was synchronized to any timer but I failed. Much simpler is to ask Michael Wood: is the movement animation synchronized to something ? Or does it run "at the full speed of the machine" ? But I found out the firing animation is synchronized to timer, which adds 2 per each 20 ms. I changed it to add 4 per 20ms and wait for the arty barrage before the Last Stand at Seelowe scenario. Look at the times of the pre-planned bombardment in this scenario (Fast Artillery On, scroll&movement delays @ XXX): standard timer (+2 per each 20ms) : 40 seconds, modified timer (+4 per each 20ms) : 29 seconds. Is there any desire to speed up the animation timer during fast arty bombardment ? The sound is no longer played with fast artillery so the synchronization is not important. [This message has been edited by ASDN (edited July 22, 2000).]



Voriax -> (7/23/2000 1:11:00 AM)

Well, that initial bombardment took 35 seconds in my machine. I don't think that this needs changing, the bombardment at Seelowe is about the biggest you can find in any scenario so far. So usually you encounter much smaller and less time-consuming bombardments. Voriax



David Heath -> (7/23/2000 1:14:00 AM)

Hi Guys We just finished make some code changes to the game that has now speed it up a great deal. Expect it in v3.0 and Thank Mike Wood. He really is an incrediable programmer. David



Wild Bill -> (7/23/2000 1:22:00 AM)

Amen to that, David. Michael Wood and Tom Proudfoot are two wonderful assets to the Matrix Team. Great guys to work with too! WB ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.84375